11 Jan 12 | Leveson Inquiry
Associated Newspapers’ legal chief was questioned at the Leveson Inquiry today over the company’s statement accusing Hugh Grant of making “mendacious smears” against the paper.
Liz Hartley said Grant has used speculation “to accuse our group of phone hacking, which is a very serious allegation. We respond by defending ourselves.”
“And you’re responding by accusing him of perjury,” Lord Justice Leveson responded.
During his November testimony, Hugh Grant spoke of a 2007 story in the Mail on Sunday that claimed his relationship with Jemima Khan was on the rocks due to his late night calls with a “plummy voiced” studio executive. Grant said the only way the paper could have sourced the story was through accessing his voicemail, and that he “would love to hear what their source was if it wasn’t phone hacking”.
Associated Newspapers, the Mail’s publisher, responded with a statement accusing Grant of making “mendacious smears driven by his hatred of the media”. Hartley also revealed today that editor Paul Dacre, due to appear at the Inquiry next month, helped to draft the statement.
Victims’ lawyer David Sherborne suggested to Leveson this afternoon that the journalists responsible should give evidence under oath on 6 February to establish the source of the article.
Associated Newspapers has consistently denied that any of its staff were involved in phone hacking.
The Mail’s recent coverage of Grant, namely the birth of his daughter, was also a topic of discussion. Hartley denied that details regarding the birth had been obtained from a hospital source, asserting that the source came from Grant’s “celebrity circle” of friends.
She noted the difficulty of reporters establishing facts in the story, suggesting the real solution to this would have been for Grant’s publicists to say they would prefer the media to “desist”.
The Inquiry continues tomorrow with evidence from Daily Express publisher Northern & Shell.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
21 Dec 11 | Leveson Inquiry
A former financial reporter at the Daily Mirror has told the Leveson Inquiry that phone hacking seemed to happen daily at the paper, and was “openly discussed”.
James Hipwell, who wrote the City Slickers column for the paper from 1998 before being jailed in 2006 for writing about firms he owned shares in, stood by his witness statement in which he said phone hacking was a “bog-standard journalistic tool”. He told the Inquiry the practice was openly discussed by the showbiz desk, recounting that the team had deleted a message from a celebrity’s voicemail to stop the rival paper, the Sun, intercepting and getting the story.
“It didn’t seem to me to be an ethical way to behave, but it seemed a generally accepted method to get a story,” Hipwell said.
He said he did not report the practice to former editor Piers Morgan because it seemed that it was “entirely accepted” by senior editors on the paper.” He said that, while he did not see hacking talked about in front of genuine management of the company, he witnessed it being discussed with senior editorial managers.
Hipwell also said he witnessed a colleague hacking into Morgan’s phone in early 2000, although he said he did not think it elicited any useful information.
Morgan told the Inquiry yesterday he had “no reason to believe” the practice was occurring at the tabloid while he was editor from 1995 to 2004.
In a witness statement to the Inquiry, Morgan said Hipwell’s claims were the “unsubstantiated allegations of a liar and convicted criminal.”
Hipwell said he could not prove Morgan knew about the practice, but added that “looking at his style of editorship, I would say it was unlikely he didn’t know it was going on.”
He said Morgan was the tabloid’s “beating heart” and “dear leader”. He described how Morgan would go up behind reporters and look at what they were writing on screen, and would re-write headlines and copy late at night after publication.
“The newspaper was built around the cult of Piers,” Hipwell said, noting that as editor he did his job “very well”.
Yesterday Morgan told the Inquiry editors only knew 5% of what their reporters were doing, and that he only “very occasionally” asked reporters about the sources of their stories.
Yet, Hipwell said, “nothing really happened on that [showbiz] desk without Piers knowing about it.”
Hipwell also contradicted Morgan’s statement that the PCC code was on the wall of Mirror newsroom. He told the Inquiry he was never briefed about the code or journalistic ethics, and that he did not see any visible signs of ethical leadership from the paper’s senior managers.
He said corporate governance was not a term used in the newspaper office.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
20 Dec 11 | Leveson Inquiry
Former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan told the Leveson Inquiry he does not believe phone hacking took place at the paper under his leadership.
Morgan said he had “no reason to believe” the practice was occurring at the tabloid. He added that he has never been made aware of any evidence of paying police officers while he was at the Daily Mirror.
He admitted private investigators were used “from time to time” at the redtop, but said he was “never directly involved”.
“Certainly all journalists knew they had to act within the confines of the law,” he said.
Morgan edited the Daily Mirror between 1995 and 2004, as well as the News of the World from January 1994 to November 1995.
Speaking to the Inquiry via video link this afternoon, Morgan challenged former Mirror reporter James Hipwell’s written statement that phone hacking was so frequent it seemed like a “bog-standard journalistic tool”.
Morgan said that “not a single person has made a formal or legal complaint against the Daily Mirror for phone hacking.”
He added he did not believe he had ever listened to recordings of what he knew to be illegally obtained voicemail messages.
Being quizzed about his diary entry from January 2001, in which he referred to the “little trick” of being able to listen to mobile phone messages, Morgan said he could not remember who had made him aware of this method.
During questioning by counsel to the Inquiry, Robert Jay QC, Morgan admitted he had listened to a tape recording of a voicemail message from Sir Paul McCartney to Heather Mills, but declined to say how he obtained it so as not to “compromise” his source.
When asked if he was acting ethically, Morgan said, “it doesn’t necessarily follow that listening to someone else talking to someone else is unethical.”
Lord Justice Leveson said he was “perfectly happy” to call Mills to see whether she authorised Morgan to listen to her voicemail.
He was also asked why he said in an April 2007 interview that phone hacking was “widespread”. He replied that “the Fleet Street rumour mill, which is always very noisy and not always particularly accurate, was buzzing loudly”, adding that he felt Clive Goodman, the News of the World reporter jailed for phone hacking in the same year, was “made a scapegoat”.
“I feel sorry for him,” Morgan said.
Describing the industry, Morgan said that editors “know only 5 per cent of what their journalists are doing at any given time”, and that he had only “very occasionally” asked reporters about the sources of their stories.
He described victims’ lawyer David Sherborne’s assertion that he had learned of phone hacking through whistleblower Steven Nott as “absolute rubbish”. He said Sherborne was “massively self-inflating” the importance of the story, and that Nott was “slightly barking” and a leading a “psychotic campaign”.
The Inquiry continues tomorrow, with Hipwell giving evidence.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
15 Dec 11 | Leveson Inquiry
The former editor of the News of the World revealed he was afraid there “could have been bombs under newsroom floor” when he joined the tabloid after the 2006 phone hacking scandal.
Colin Myler told the Leveson Inquiry today he “didn’t know where they [the bombs] were or when they were going to go off”.
He revealed he “always had some discomfort” upon becoming editor in 2007, shortly after the paper’s Royal reporter Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire had been jailed for hacking phones of members of the Royal family.
“There was no appetite to go back to that place,” Myler said.
He echoed Tom Crone’s testimony that News International’s settlement with PFA boss Gordon Taylor over a phone hacking claim did not suggest a “culture of cover-up” at the company. Myler argued it was “not wrong or unreasonable” for a company to protect its reputation, noting that NI was “dealing with a very difficult negotiation” and that Taylor “wanted £1 million or to go to trial”.
“I remember being told he wanted to humiliate the paper,” Myler said.
He added that “nobody was very keen” on a trial following the Goodman-Mulcaire convictions.
Referring to the 10 June 2008 meeting with Crone and News Corp CEO James Murdoch to settle the Taylor claim, Myler said he “didn’t recall” whether Crone had shown Murdoch the front page of the “damning email” that implicated other reporters in phone hacking. But he added he had “no reason to disbelieve” Crone’s testimony.
Myler conceded that the email, also known as the ‘for Neville’ email (referring to former News of the World chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck) was evidence that the paper’s previous defence of hacking being limited to “one rogue reporter” was not sustainable.
Meanwhile he said he did not recollect the 3 June 2008 opinion of the company’s leading counsel that there was a “culture of illegal infrmation access” at the tabloid. “That would hit you absolutely between the eyes,” Lord Justice Leveson responded.
Myler reiterated his main recollection was the ‘for Neville’ email, which he said was “fatal” to the company’s case.
Taylor was eventually paid over £700,000 by News International in 2008.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson.
